Megathread SRS and GRS surgeons and associated horrors - the medical community of experimental surgeons, the secret community of home butchers

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Because you see, the most masculine, manly, and gender affirming thing a male could ever do is gestate a fetus inside of their uterus for 9 months, expel that baby through their vagina and then have enlarged manly pecs that lactate the manliest of breast milks to feed their baby,

It's like you don't even know what being a man is actually about.
No kidding. There were so many things I couldn't drink/eat when I was nursing because "it might impact the baby". I highly doubt impulsive people who go through transitioning are going to have the self-discipline to avoid potentially toxic substances while breastfeeding. I also shudder to think how they'd react if their infant refused to breastfeed, which is a phenomenon many women experience when they attempt to breastfeed. Would they accuse their own infants of being "transphobic"? Some "normal" women see their infants' refusal to breastfeed as a form of "rejection" and become emotional train wrecks because of it.
 
I'm crossposting from the sideshow thread, copying @President Jeb Bush post.

FOUND something fascinating. The first sex change was actually performed in 1903, using the penile inversion method (something the media claim was invented in the 1950s!). On a 'pseudohermaphrodite', this person had a strange appearance from what is listed in this 1903 medical journal. Fascinating as fuck honestly.
Oh and within the notes pages, it claims that someone had done an operation similar in the 1880s. (wow)

I warn it's a fairly big article but is so interesting and there's some images, that are sorta gross but quite eye-opening.

I have re-formatted it into paragraphs for easier reading!

The patient was referred to me February 28, 1903, by the family physician living in one of the suburbs of New York, and gave the following history;

E.C., aged twenty years, born in New York State, of Irish parentage; father and mother both living, also four brothers and four sisters, all of whom, as far as she knows, are strong and well and normal in every way.

Patient has never menstruated; was strong and well till four years ago; weighed 120 pounds, but has gradually lost flesh year by year, and now weighs only 99 pounds.

She was educated in the public schools and graduated from the grammar school two years ago ; has a weak stomach and occasional attacks of indigestion.

She has never had any girl love affairs or been attracted passionately by any girl, but has been attracted by boys; says that "that thing" (the clitoris) began to develop to a noticeable degree when the hair began to develop on the pubes, fourteen to fifteen years of age; played with it some at that time and experienced pleasurable sensations therefrom; has erections at times and at first feels that it is pleasant, but eventually dis appoints and annoys her; wants to get rid of “the growth.”

In deportment the patient was somewhat shy and modest, and gave the impression that she did not care to reveal the facts she had stated, but was determined to get relief, and had decided to go through whatever ordeal was necessary to secure it. She came to my office alone, and heavily veiled to conceal the growth of hair upon her lip, face, and chin. In appearance she showed feminine taste in dress, which was neat and in good style.

PHYSICAL EXAMINATION.

- Height, 5 feet 17 / 8 inches.
- Weight, 100 pounds at present.
- Gait, feminine in character.
- Voice, feminine, with occasional male tendency.
- Hair growth on the head coarse, abundant, and black; eyebrows black and heavy, meet between the eyes
hair on upper lip well developed; on chin well developed; also strong growth in front of ears to angle of jaw. Growth is sparse between angle and chin. Chin is square and jaw heavy, otherwise face is female type; features are small; eyes are brown.
- Arms not well developed, hair growth abundant.
- Hands medium in size ; fingers square and strong , with large joints .
- Neck larger than normal for a female.
- Mammary Gland . No mammary development; neither fat nor glandular tissue, strictly male type.
- Areola dark brown and about 14 inch in extent from nipple. It is encircled by small black hairs.
- Abdomen. Longitudinal hair line well developed from one inch above umbilicus to pubic hair, which is very thick. There is no transverse abdominal hair line.
- Spine .No deformity. Lower Extremities. Hair growth excessive.
- Pelvis flaring . Measurements : Interspinal , 271 / 2 cm . ; inter crestal , 281 / 2 cm . ; external conjugate , 18 cm .
- Heart, normal.
- Lungs, normal.

On examining the genitals the enlarged clitoris with prominent glans, as shown in Fig . 1, obtruded itself and became erectile on the slightest touch.

It was surrounded with a corona of hair and surmounted on the mons veneris with a luxuriant tuft.

An excessive growth of hair covered all the surrounding parts and ex tended down on to the thighs.

The clitoris measured three inches in length and three and a half inches in circumference.

The fore skin could be drawn forward on to the glans , but retracted strongly in erection.

The clitoris was restricted in its action as in chordee hy a broad frenum, which reached from near the glans down to the under surface of the symphysis and disappeared with in a little opening one - quarter of an inch in diameter, the urogenital cleft.

A narrow strip of mucous membrane ran along the free border of the frenum as in cases of hypospadias . The clitoris was impervious and the meatus urinarius could not be discovered. Below the introitus was a broad perineum reaching to the anus.

The vaginal opening took a Peaslee sound readily to the depth of four and a half inches and the caliber of the canal seemed to enlarge at the distal end . Under bimanual manipulation with finger in the rectum no internal generative organs could be out lined except a cord - like extension from the upper end of the vagina.
(my note - the fuck?)

The patient insisted that “the growth” was a great annoyance, that it made her different from other girls, and she wanted it taken off. When asked if she preferred to be made like a man or woman, said decidedly "a woman.” Accordingly she was sent to the Polyclinic Hospital, and the operation was done March 11, 1903, in the presence of the class and some invited guests.

View attachment 1900483

Fig . 1 . (ABOVE) - Appearance before operating. The round black spot below the clitoris shows opening to vagina. From its upper border a strip of mucous membrane extended to the glans along the free border of the frenum. Mucous membrane covered the median line of perineum for two inches toward the anus; shows light in the picture.

Operation .
— With the patient under ether and the parts shaved and sterilized, by a little steady pressure I gradually insinuated my little finger into the urogenital cleft to its full length and then the index finger, being careful to dilate* rather than tear.
(*first use of the word dilate in relation to neo-vag?!?!?!)

At the depth of two and a half inches a strong constricting band of dense, resisting tissue was encountered, through which my finger was forced with difficulty. With the tissue put upon the stretch by bearing down with this finger strongly on the perineum two lateral incisions (one on either side) were made with scissors from the outer edge of the canal to and including the constricting band . The depth of these incisions went only through the vaginal sheath.

By firm pressure first with one finger in the urogenital cleft and then with two these incisions were torn deep into the tissues, resisting strands being snipped as they presented. In this way the caliber of the cleft was enlarged to a diameter of two and a half inches.

At this juncture the meatus urinarius was searched for and discovered just under the internal border of the symphysis pubis, and a catheter passed, demonstrated the position of the bladder and the presence of urine.

View attachment 1900484

Fig. 2. (ABOVE) — The clitoris after removal, the skin having been dissected.

The skin adjacent to the vulva was so harsh and bristled so with hair that it was not available for filling in the lateral gaps in the mucous membrane of the vagina.

The only apparent resource was to allow them to fill up by granulation, when suddenly the thought occurred to me, Why not use the skin covering the clitoris? This was soft and delicate and free from hair.
It was therefore decided upon.
A longitudinal incision was made along the dorsum of the clitoris and another along the ventral surface, and a circular incision just back of the corona of the glans.

These flaps were carefully dissected off down to the base of the clitoris and left attached. The base of the clitoris was transfixed inside the flap with chromic gut and cut away. ( Fig .2.) The flaps of skin with their bases still attached were drawn down into the urogenital cleft and stitched in position on either side by catgut sutures, care being taken to make them reach in as far as possible by dragging down the skin upon the mons veneris and abdomen and holding it in place by firm straps of adhesive plaster passed around under each thigh.

The clitoris measuring three and a half inches in circumference, afforded two flaps, each one and a half inches wide, growing broader at the base.
These together with the anterior and posterior strips of membrane of the cleft made a vaginal canal of goodly proportions. The strip of mucous membrane on the under surface of the frenum was saved, drawn up and stitched to the stump of the clitoris.

The purpose of this was to give support to the urethra and maintain its normal position. It also made a vestibule beneath the stump of the clitoris. The stump was covered with the skin from the mons as it was drawn down by the adhesive plaster.

View attachment 1900485

Fig.3. (ABOVE) — Glass tube in place during convalescence; the
patient's hand holds the tube. (First dilation!)

There was considerable hemorrhage from the lateral incisions, but no large vessels were incised, and what hemorrhage occurred was controlled by applications of adrenalin chlorid. The vaginal canal was packed moderately full of iodoform gauze, sufficient pressure being made to smooth out the skin flaps and bring their entire surface in contact with the underlying tissue.
(my note - exactly like SRS today, fascinating)

A self - retaining catheter was inserted into the bladder.

The dressings were removed on the fourth day and a glass tube substituted in the vagina to maintain pressure upon the flaps and secure its calibre, as shown in Fig .3.

The entire wound healed! by first intention and the patient left the hospital at the end of four weeks .Fig. 2 shows the exact size of the clitoris after being stripped of skin and removed.

View attachment 1900486

Fig .4. (ABOVE) - Photograph three weeks after operation.

Fig .4 shows the condition at the end of four weeks. The vagina closed snugly, but readily admitted two fingers and permitted of further dilatation by slight pressure. Later digital and specular examinations revealed a small cervix at the head of the vagina, which took a small sound to the depth of one and three - quarter inches. A small gland could also be made out on the left side, but it had more the feel and shape of an enlarged lymphatic, although it may be a rudimentary ovary


---
TLDR - Penile inversion of a hermaphrodite in 1903. That's one for the history books.
thank you for that. I'll remember to keep stuff like that in this thread. I wish all the Transgender stuff was in one location lol.
We have like 10 threads with different functions!

thank you!!
 
Oh, it is done for a while now. Here is an article about trans woman breastfeeding his baby. Although, by the end it didn't work out so much, as he hadn't produced enough milk.

Notice how he gets off on it:
I could feel my brain rewiring, creating pathways that would permanently connect me to my child. (And yeah, I kind of got off on it. Don't judge.)
But it is not a fetish. No way.

Another link about trans women Breastfeeding, The last one outright say that
The lactation thing for me just affirmed my womanhood, I think that was the most important part.
Affirmation. Validation. Was there any research about the quality of this milk? I don't see any remark on that in any of the articles. Feels like that's kind of important, but what do I know.
 
Would they accuse their own infants of being "transphobic"?
They definitely will.

And just imagine the lingering festering resentment and hatred they're inevitably going to have towards their child, no matter what. Because they'll be jealous of a baby of one gender, and resentful of the other.

A recipe for a fantastically well-adjusted child.

(And yeah, I kind of got off on it. Don't judge.)
Okay, if I can't be the judge, I'll just be the jury and executioner instead.

That work for you?
 
Morbidly obese FTM has her tits chopped off and claims to be "incredibly happy with her result, especially as a bigger guy". Press X to doubt.





Of course the comments are all "hell yeah dude". Couldn't be more cringe.

Yooo how much test you gotta spike to grow all that hair? Goggle says they only take 50-100mg per WEEK but there's no way, mild TRT for men is 50mg topical DAILY, topicals go up to 80mg daily or so officially, and injections amount to roughly 75-100mg per week.

You're telling me a bitch can grow more chest and gut hair than I'll ever have on only 100mg of test per week? She must have been a real fuckin' ogre to begin with.
 
Oh, it is done for a while now. Here is an article about trans woman breastfeeding his baby. Although, by the end it didn't work out so much, as he hadn't produced enough milk.

Notice how he gets off on it:

But it is not a fetish. No way.

Another link about trans women Breastfeeding, The last one outright say that

Affirmation. Validation. Was there any research about the quality of this milk? I don't see any remark on that in any of the articles. Feels like that's kind of important, but what do I know.
Yeah... it's not a good idea for a new mother to make her sense of self worth contingent on her ability to breastfeed, which some women mistakenly do and then wind up in a serious mental state because of it.

God knows what they'll call tr00ns who go loopy from failed breastfeeding attempts... is there a special term for "postpartum depression" for tr00ns-- or is that "transphobic", too?

Some TMI about breastfeeding:
I don't get the whole "getting off" on breastfeeding thing. Every couple of hours, like clockwork, the sensation that notified me "it's time to nurse!" (aside from my kid making noise) was like a slow burn. The initial moments of feeding felt like a sharp pain, followed by a sensation of total relief. The relief was akin to eating when you're starving, sleeping when you're tired-- THAT kind of "relief". It wasn't anything resembling an orgasm.
 
Last edited:
Idk anything about srs (besides it being weird as fuck), but is there any sort of brain surgery option? I'm guessing not because I have never heard of it. But there has to be a better way than filleting and inverting a penis then proclaiming the problem solved. I know they'd just reeeee and compare it to a lobotomy but what they're doing now should be called a lobottomy.
 
Idk anything about srs (besides it being weird as fuck), but is there any sort of brain surgery option? I'm guessing not because I have never heard of it. But there has to be a better way than filleting and inverting a penis then proclaiming the problem solved. I know they'd just reeeee and compare it to a lobotomy but what they're doing now should be called a lobottomy.
Not yet, although these people are already act like they've been lobotomized, at times.
 
Yeah, there’s no way you can truly have informed consent here. There’s gonna be lawsuits.
Here's my question, legal/medical Kiwis - how feasible is a lawsuit against these butchers? How much cover do they have from "informed consent?" I remember some tranny complaining on Reddit about how he went back to have his surgeon check out his axe wound and asked "Where are my clitoris and labia that you said I would have?" And the doctor was like, "uh, right there," pointing to nothing in particular.

These guys are sold on a myth of "real female genitals" and a promise of parts that simply aren't present in the finished product. Do they have standing to sue? I'm amazed that there hasn't been a significant lawsuit over this already, at least not that I'm aware of. Of course the trans community will do everything in their power to quash it, but regardless. There was that FtM in the UK who camped outside of her butcher's office with protest signs, but still no legal challenge.

It boggles the mind how they can get away with doing this when there's no standard of care and the outcomes seem practically random. The threat of suicide if they don't get the chop is such weak sauce, the statistics suggest the opposite is true.
 
Here's my question, legal/medical Kiwis - how feasible is a lawsuit against these butchers? How much cover do they have from "informed consent?" I remember some tranny complaining on Reddit about how he went back to have his surgeon check out his axe wound and asked "Where are my clitoris and labia that you said I would have?" And the doctor was like, "uh, right there," pointing to nothing in particular.

These guys are sold on a myth of "real female genitals" and a promise of parts that simply aren't present in the finished product. Do they have standing to sue? I'm amazed that there hasn't been a significant lawsuit over this already, at least not that I'm aware of. Of course the trans community will do everything in their power to quash it, but regardless. There was that FtM in the UK who camped outside of her butcher's office with protest signs, but still no legal challenge.

It boggles the mind how they can get away with doing this when there's no standard of care and the outcomes seem practically random. The threat of suicide if they don't get the chop is such weak sauce, the statistics suggest the opposite is true.

From what I've seen, a lot of these surgeons have their own signature techniques and, as a result, other surgeons won't touch you once you've gotten the chop from someone else. So if the job gets botched, the only person who will work on you to fix it is the one who fucked it up in the first place, and they will absolutely freeze you out if you badmouth them.
 
From what I've seen, a lot of these surgeons have their own signature techniques and, as a result, other surgeons won't touch you once you've gotten the chop from someone else. So if the job gets botched, the only person who will work on you to fix it is the one who fucked it up in the first place, and they will absolutely freeze you out if you badmouth them.
Earlier in the thread there was a guy who got fired as a patient by his doctor after repeatedly complaining. So there are at least some victims who have nothing left to lose.

Idk anything about srs (besides it being weird as fuck), but is there any sort of brain surgery option? I'm guessing not because I have never heard of it. But there has to be a better way than filleting and inverting a penis then proclaiming the problem solved. I know they'd just reeeee and compare it to a lobotomy but what they're doing now should be called a lobottomy.
Trying to treat dysphoria psychologically is branded as conversion therapy and any attempt at it will cost you your professional career. And you don't need brain surgery for that, the antipsychotic drug pimozide has been found to treat dysphoria. In another thread I also suggested investigation into using psychedelic drugs to treat it, since when administered with the correct set and setting they can be used to break destructive behavior patterns like addictions, and presumably fetishes as well.
 
Some "normal" women see their infants' refusal to breastfeed as a form of "rejection" and become emotional train wrecks because of it.

Yeah... it's not a good idea for a new mother to make her sense of self worth contingent on her ability to breastfeed, which some women mistakenly do and then wind up in a serious mental state because of it.

It might not be a good idea but that doesn’t quite get through the thousands of years of evolution and countless instances of social messaging about worthiness that new mothers receive. Psychologically vulnerable women give birth every day. It’s neither unusual nor clinically untreatable.

Here's my question, legal/medical Kiwis - how feasible is a lawsuit against these butchers? How much cover do they have from "informed consent?"

Not that kind of doctor but in my field at least, informed consent means the participant/patient agrees to all procedures and possible ramifications, AND acknowledges the potential harmful effects or long-term consequences. These people are signing away their right to legal recourse, as far as I can tell.
 
Here's my question, legal/medical Kiwis - how feasible is a lawsuit against these butchers? How much cover do they have from "informed consent?" I remember some tranny complaining on Reddit about how he went back to have his surgeon check out his axe wound and asked "Where are my clitoris and labia that you said I would have?" And the doctor was like, "uh, right there," pointing to nothing in particular.
Basically, "informed consent" means that the doctor is supposed to go over the risks, the procedures, and costs with the patient, who is supposed to read the fine print in the paperwork before they signed it.

But realistically speaking, I doubt if an lawsuit will happen until there's a safer, more realistic outcome of SRS that has become the new standard that's actually enforced.
 
Not that kind of doctor but in my field at least, informed consent means the participant/patient agrees to all procedures and possible ramifications, AND acknowledges the potential harmful effects or long-term consequences. These people are signing away their right to legal recourse, as far as I can tell.
Ok, let's say I'm a surgeon and I've published articles about a new method I've come up with for removing lung tumors. A guy comes to me with a bad lung cancer that isn't operable by normal means and hires me to perform this new procedure. I have him sign informed consent papers because it's an experimental procedure and there are no guarantees.

He gets to the OR, I have him put under, and then, instead of doing anything to his lungs, I amputate both of his legs.

Does he have standing to sue me? Or can I just say "lol informed consent"?

As far as I understand, any medical procedure should be done with clear goals that are understood by both the doctor and patient, as long as the patient has their mental faculties. How badly must a procedure miss the mark in order for there to be a cause of action, even if there's informed consent?

The quacks tell their patients that they're getting genitals that are just like those of the opposite sex. For MtFs, they'll get a clitoris and labia and it'll lubricate itself and won't collapse after the stitches break. FtMs probably expect a penis that won't get gangrene and they also have horrific consequences from using T, like uterine cancer, autoimmune diseases, etc. And Lupron is a whole other can of worms. How many of the doctors prescribing it ten minutes after meeting a 12-year old girl who doesn't like her body tell her that it'll give her osteoporosis by the time she's 20?

The "proper" outcomes for these treatments aren't even clearly defined, since there's no standard of care. It's clear that in many cases there are results that 1) the patient absolutely doesn't want and 2) the provider knows are highly likely. Shouldn't a smart lawyer be able to build a case from this? Or is informed consent a blank check to medically troll people? "Sorry about your legs, bro."
 
Ok, let's say I'm a surgeon and I've published articles about a new method I've come up with for removing lung tumors. A guy comes to me with a bad lung cancer that isn't operable by normal means and hires me to perform this new procedure. I have him sign informed consent papers because it's an experimental procedure and there are no guarantees.

He gets to the OR, I have him put under, and then, instead of doing anything to his lungs, I amputate both of his legs.

Does he have standing to sue me? Or can I just say "lol informed consent"?

As far as I understand, any medical procedure should be done with clear goals that are understood by both the doctor and patient, as long as the patient has their mental faculties. How badly must a procedure miss the mark in order for there to be a cause of action, even if there's informed consent?

The quacks tell their patients that they're getting genitals that are just like those of the opposite sex. For MtFs, they'll get a clitoris and labia and it'll lubricate itself and won't collapse after the stitches break. FtMs probably expect a penis that won't get gangrene and they also have horrific consequences from using T, like uterine cancer, autoimmune diseases, etc. And Lupron is a whole other can of worms. How many of the doctors prescribing it ten minutes after meeting a 12-year old girl who doesn't like her body tell her that it'll give her osteoporosis by the time she's 20?

The "proper" outcomes for these treatments aren't even clearly defined, since there's no standard of care. It's clear that in many cases there are results that 1) the patient absolutely doesn't want and 2) the provider knows are highly likely. Shouldn't a smart lawyer be able to build a case from this? Or is informed consent a blank check to medically troll people? "Sorry about your legs, bro."
Not a lawyer, but for SRS, there’s clearly tons of results available to see online. That’s the part where you’re supposed to self inform.

With hormones, all hormones for trans people are used off label, which means trans people are supposed to know that they haven’t gone through the same approval process as other drugs. It is, again, not a secret that T causes uterine atrophy etc.

For children, yes, it’s a different situation, but for adults, the point of informed consent is that you’re aware of the risks and you’re willing to do it anyway. It’s not like an experimental lung cancer treatment because we know what the outcomes are even if there haven’t been formal studies.
 
It also doesn't help that those seeking these kinds of surgeries can't reliably self-inform themselves of possible complications and long term issues because the community routinely shuts down any form of negativity surrounding the procedures. Surgeons actively lie and only post their "best" outcomes online in an attempt to dupe the poor souls who sign their rights away to have these surgeries.

Even information regarding synthetic hormones and "puberty blockers" are viciously censored, because you can't have curious members of the community knowing what's in store for them when they go to get the chop. The only reason these people end up so surprised and horrified by their results is because they refuse to actually put in the effort to get around the trans community's ridiculous information blackouts and read sources that conflict with their worldview. I'm sure this thread would deter many.
 
The only reason these people end up so surprised and horrified by their results is because they refuse to actually put in the effort to get around the trans community's ridiculous information blackouts and read sources that conflict with their worldview.

But troons are notorious for rejecting the truth. Even if they had all the information about the horrors of srs many would still run to the dick butcher and regret it later.
 
Back